Rent a Signal service development and suggestions - page 41
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
ND last month I already said to you to add me on your list but I kinda dont get anything.How I can be a signal seller?Can I manual instead of using EA? Please PM me the details to test this service.
Yes, you can trade manually.
As I said in my previous post so next week I will start to contact with every possible seller separatedly. Just send PM to me in the next week (or during the weekend for example).
RAS seems to be functioning fine for me as a beta-seller from my live trading MT4 account...I have abondoned the idea of mutlitiple platforms for now...maybe someday it will be possible.
Are any of you beta testers getting any errors?
ES
P.S. I really like the new equity charts in RAS statistics.
P.P.S. When this service is rolled out next year we will need to spread the word and hopefully we will have an entire family of sellers from different places.
There are new developments in the USA regarding proposed new rules for FCM's. I must say forexsavior is a tremendous asset to this forum.
https://www.forex-tsd.com/forum/commercial-talks/5075-interbankfx/page14#comment_340538
You ask why do I post this here in this thread?....
Well..it will affect RAS and there development with multiple platforms to feed a single signal...there will be no hedging allowed in the same account....RAS is a single account...so if there are two platforms that the seller uses with different EA's on the same pair....well if they get long and short at the same time...it will be a single account and first in and first out basis will apply to RAS subscribers....
ES
P.S. Now this will only apply to the USA dealers...this will get confusing for Europe and other countries subscribing to RAS...
ES, agree. Forexsavior's alerts are a must, imho (though many may suspect of a hidden agenda). I don't judge this, just find the alerts useful.
I hope this hedge prohibition don't pass. I do with my money whatever I want and I don't need pseudo-regulators say "Jairo, don't, hedge, it is stupid, bla, bla, bla". Again, the money is mine. The only thing that matters is my equity line going up. Of course, EAs and trading methods may be adapted. The BIG PLAYERS will hedge whatever they like through many brokers around the world. This rule stands for their interests, making things harder for the small ones.
Jairo,
I think that the concern might be with the capital requirements for the dealer...not you...They could simply double IBFX's 30 million requirement to 60 Million....is my opinion...The Dealers with 400:1 and hedging would all have a 60 million requirement in the USA. Dealers with 100:1 and hedging would have a 40 million requirement...
ES
ES, agree. Forexsavior's alerts are a must, imho (though many may suspect of a hidden agenda). I don't judge this, just find the alerts useful. I hope this hedge prohibition don't pass. I do with my money whatever I want and I don't need pseudo-regulators say "Jairo, don't, hedge, it is stupid, bla, bla, bla". Again, the money is mine. The only thing that matters is my equity line going up. Of course, EAs and trading methods may be adapted. The BIG PLAYERS will hedge whatever they like through many brokers around the world. This rule stands for their interests, making things harder for the small ones.
Jairo,
I think that the concern might be with the capital requirements for the dealer...not you...They could simply double IBFX's 30 million requirement to 60 Million....is my opinion...The Dealers with 400:1 and hedging would all have a 60 million requirement in the USA. Dealers with 100:1 and hedging would have a 40 million requirement...
ESYes, that would be good, as well as accounts segregation to better protect clients' capital and fight FRAUD (which they don't do so well as they should), not telling traders how to trade. NFA is a club of big players and mostly protect their interests.
When a company goes bankrupt remember "who" you made your check payable to when you funded...☺
Ask Refco's clients how the segregation and the bankruptcy worked together? Its all an illusion for your confidence....Defining Risk just keeps gettin' tougher every day...(sang with the keep on rockin' me baby tune by the Steve Miller Band)
ES
P.S. You can't take the thief away from the larceny in his heart....and you can't take the larceny out of the thief...
Yes, that would be good, as well as accounts segregation to better protect clients' capital and fight FRAUD (which they don't do so well as they should), not telling traders how to trade. NFA is a club of big players and mostly protect their interests.
(...)
Ask Refco's clients how the segregation and the bankruptcy worked together? Its all an illusion for your confidence....Defining Risk just keeps gettin' tougher every day...
(...)Hmm... interesting. Googled "Refco segregation". Not an absolute guarantee, of course. Thanks for the tip.
Now imagine what the Wild West of Forex can dream up with your funds...hehe
Specifically, the complaint alleges that Refco wire transferred its customer funds out of a customer segregated account in Chicago, in amounts ranging from $2 million to $123 million on an almost daily basis, to its RCC affiliate, for RCC's use. RCC would allegedly simultaneously write a check for the amount of the wire transfer and deposit that check into Refco's segregated funds account in New York; however, at the time RCC wrote the check to Refco's segregated funds account, there were insufficient funds in RCC's account to cover the check. The complaint further alleges that these checks would take up to several days to clear RCC's account and, in the interim, RCC would use Refco's customer funds to pay down its loans and later would increase its loans to cover the check and allow it to clear. Because of these alleged transfers, Refco was allegedly undersegregated at various times by amounts ranging from $219,000 to $102 million and failed to reflect such deficiencies on its required segregation reports.
Furthermore, the complaint alleges that Refco wire transferred approximately $60 million of excess margin funds from at least 1,000 commodity customers' segregated accounts to nonsegregated accounts in the names of those same customers at RCC. Refco allegedly failed to disclose adequately to its customers the nature of such transfers to RCC, particularly that the account receiving the money transfers was not segregated. As a result, the complaint alleges that these transfers were not properly authorized by Refco's customers.
ES, thanks for the info.